International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpvp

Experimental parametric equation for the prediction of valve coefcient (Cv)

for choke valve trims
Andrew Grace, Patrick Frawley*
Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history:
Received 16 July 2009
Received in revised form
28 April 2010
Accepted 25 November 2010

The calculation of nominal choke valve size determines the effective capacity for an oil and gas production
system. The degree of restriction for the controlling area in the valve is a function of the surrounding
geometry. In an orice plate this is known as the velocity of approach and can be used to determine the
meter coefcient (Cm). This paper presents a technique for choke valves, based on the meter velocity of
approach parameter, which can be used to predict the Valve Coefcient (Cv) for new trim designs. The
prediction method uses a data trend based on a number of ow tests conducted on various trim characteristics. The resultant parametric equation is used to predict the Cv of a new trim geometry. The method
relies on experimental data determined per IEC 60534-2-3, with calculations per IEC 60534-2-1. This paper
further investigates the effect of varying upstream geometry on Cv for a 400 nominal valve.
2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:
Choke valve
Valve coefcient
Cv
Meter coefcient
Velocity of approach
Valve sizing
Valve ow test
Valve characteristic

1. Introduction
Control valves are used primarily to control operating conditions such as ow, pressure and temperature in uid systems. A
choke valve is a special type of control valve typically used in heavy
industries like oil and gas production. The term choke valve is
derived from the choked ow operating condition, wherein the
limiting ow condition has been reached. Choke valves are generally located at the production block (known as the Christmas Tree
or XT). It is the rst control valve seen by the production uid and
as the primary restriction governs the operating capacity of the
well.
A choke valve is sized based on the natural parameters of the
reservoir including; pressure, temperature and uid properties, but
also the design of downstream systems including; pressure rating
and production capacity. An undersized control choke can ultimately reduce the operating capacity of the production system
leading to commercial losses. An oversized choke valve has
a reduced controlling range which inhibits adjustment and can also
lead to increased erosion due to high velocity, Hutchinson [1].
A choke valve consists of an inlet and outlet bore, typically an
annulus, a trim and an actuation system (manual or automated), as

detailed in Fig. 1. The choke valve is used to take the majority of the
pressure drop in a system and as such the valve may be a number of
nominal sizes less than connecting pipe-work. In this case the inlet
and outlet connections may include line reducers. The trim consists
of a cylindrical cage with ports for ow and an internal plug which
is linearly actuated to open ow area.
The calculation of the valve size required to control a reservoir
condition is a function of the valves internal geometry. The current
industrial standard IEC 60534-2-1 [2] for sizing valves requires
a series of ow tests to be completed which dene three parameters of internal geometry. For any valve designed to have a unique
control characteristic [2] would require a manufacturer to rst
produce the valve, then ow test it, before conrming that the
design meets the required controllability. Without a design rationale this would lead to a costly iterative process. This paper will
describe a design technique wherein the valve internal geometry
parameters are interpolated from experimental data, based on
a new non-dimensional geometry ratio. This non-dimensional ratio
is derived from the restrictive geometry of an orice plate and the
non-dimensional geometry ratio used therein. This technique will
then be applied to a sample case to demonstrate its use.
2. Valve sizing and the meter coefcient

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 353 61202178.

E-mail address: patrick.frawley@ul.ie (P. Frawley).
0308-0161/$ e see front matter 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijpvp.2010.11.002

Sizing is the term given to the calculation of the restrictive area

in a valve required to control a specic operating condition.

110

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

Nomenclature
A2
Cd
Cv
Cm
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
FL
E
G
h
k
m
N
Pvc

orice area, m2
coefcient of discharge, dimensionless
valve coefcient, dimensionless
meter coefcient, dimensionless
upstream pipe diameter, m
orice diameter, m
vena contracta diameter, m
valve annular diameter, m
valve central diameter, m
valve cage diameter, m
pressure recovery factor, dimensionless
mixture quality, dimensionless
specic gravity, dimensionless
length of annular area, m
ratio of specic heats, dimensionless
mass ow rate, Kg/s
slope of a line, dimensionless
pressure at the vena contracta, Pa

Driskell [3] rst introduced the concept of a valve coefcient (Cv)

to quantify the restrictive area in terms of the effective ow area.
The calculation of Cv is based on previous work conducted on the
orice plate meter coefcient (Cm). For a simplied restriction as
shown in Fig. 2 it is evident that the convergence of the ow
streams toward the orice creates a reduced downstream ow
area (vena contracta e VC).
For liquid ow the volumetric ow rate across this restriction
can be given in terms of its geometry by rearranging Bernoullis
equation, see Eq. (1).

valve inlet pressure, Pa

valve outlet pressure, Pa
volumetric ow rate, m3/s
pressure ratio e P1/P2, dimensionless
theoretical critical pressure ratio, dimensionless
saturation entropy at the vena contracta, J/K
difference between saturated vapour and liquid
entropies at vena contracta, J/K
entropy at VC, J/K
vapour pressure in VC, kPa
vena contracta, acronym
specic volume, m3/Kg
gas critical pressure drop ratio, dimensionless
gas pressure drop ratio e P1 e P2/P2, dimensionless
gas expansion factor, dimensionless
valve velocity of approach, dimensionless
ratio of upstream pipe diameter to restriction
diameter, dimensionless
upstream density, Kg/m3

P1
P2
Q
R
rc
SF
SFG
SVC
VVC
VC
V
xT
X
Y

a
B

r1
2

3
v
2
6 u
7p
Q Cd 4A2 u
t
 4 5 2P1  Pvc =r1
D2
1  D1

(1)

where Cd is the coefcient of discharge, accounting for the difference in geometrical ow area to effective ow area and is the ratio
of actual mass ow rate (taken at the orice area) to ideal mass ow
rate (taken at the VC area), see Eq. (2). For gas, Eq. (1) can be further
generalised by introducing a gas expansion factor Y, yielding Eq. (3),
where Y 1 for incompressible uids.

mActual
mIdeal

(2)

3
v
u
1
7p
6
m YCd 4A2 u
t
 4 5 2r1 P1  Pvc
2
1 D
D1
2

(3)

For an orice plate Cm is dened as the product of Cd and the

geometry terms of the specic restriction. Eq. (3) can be given for
an orice meter as Eq. (4), where the ratio of restriction diameter to
inlet diameter is b, see Eq. (5). b can be used to determine Cm and
the location of the VC. Fig. 3 details the change in Cm for xed
Reynolds number based on an increasing value of b. Fig. 4 denes
the distance of the VC from the restriction based on a number of
pipe-diameters. b is commonly referred to as the velocity of
approach.

Fig. 1. Right angled choke valve assembly.

Fig. 2. Orice plate geometry.

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

111

Fig. 3. Essom [4]. Plot of meter coefcient (Cm) versus b, for a corner tapped orice
plate.

m Cm YA2

p
2r1 P1  Pvc

(4)

where; Cm Cd 1=1  b4 

D2
D1

(5)

3. A valve specic sizing equation

Eq. (4) equates the ow rate for a given orice size based on the
pressure drop across it. The effective capacity (Cm) of the meter and
the size/location of the VC can be determined from the surrounding
geometry (b). A valve specic form of Eq. (4) can be derived by
determining a gas expansion factor Y and a pressure recovery factor
(FL). This equation when written in terms of Cv can be used to
calculate the required Cv based on the eld data (given as pressure,
ow rate and uid properties).
In practice a manufacturer produces a series of valve sizes with
over lapping ow areas which are then tested to produce a series of
ow curves, plotting rated Cv versus stem travel. These curves give
standard control proles or characteristics including; linear, equal
percentage and quick opening, see Fig. 5 Baumann [6]. When
a customer application is sized the required Cv is plotted on the
standard pre-produced ow curves. The selection of a valve may
require numerous calculations of required Cv which determine the
controlling points required over its life. These may represent the
maximum and minimum conditions wherein ow rate is high and
pressure differential low or visa versa. Or they may represent
a spectrum of conditions representing reservoir pressure uctuations

Fig. 5. Baumann [5]. Standard ow characteristics.

over the life of the well. The suitability of a particular trim is based on
the required Cv values lying in the controlling range of the ow curve
(best practice suggests a range of 20%e80% of total capacity).
For any new trim geometry both a sizing equation and a ow
curve are required. Under certain conditions the controlling
requirements of a well may require a customised characteristic. For
example some production systems require capacity limits and
controls to ensure that well pressure is relieved gradually over
time. As the well is a formation of brittle rock under high pressure
sudden pressure differentials can cause the structure to collapse.
These sudden well shocks can be caused by trim characteristics
where controllability varies considerably over a small range with
respect to valve stem travel. Once a well has produced for a number
of years the likelihood of collapse reduces as the pressure depletes.
This means that the control choke capacity needs to increase
dramatically near the end of its range to enable the same ow rates
at the lower pressure drops. If this characteristic does not exist in
the manufacturers range a new trim must be designed. Therefore
a rationale is required to predict rated Cv for a new trim design
based on its area open to ow, before manufacturing and test. Also
an equation is required to calculate required Cv so it can be plotted
on the ow curve (rated Cv versus travel) and the controllability
determined.
3.1. Gas expansion factor, Y
For an ideal restriction Y is the adiabatic expansion of the gas as
it travels from P1 to P2, Eq. (6). For the orice restriction shown in
Fig. 2 the adiabatic assumption does not hold. Buckingham [7] and
Bean [8] dened Y for an orice plate with anged pressure taps
upstream and at the VC point in Eq. (7), which was subsequently
adopted by ASME. To dene the Y factor Buckingham and Bean
completed a series of discharge coefcient tests using water on
a xed orice at various pressure drops. The tests were repeated
with gas on the same orice at the exact same ow rates and
pressure drops. The variance between the discharge coefcients for
both tests was the Y factor. The nearest t curve seen was disputed
in further analysis by Kinghorn [9]. Kinghorn proposed that at high
values of Y (circa Y 0.95) that the Buckingham and Bean coefcients were in error by as much as 0.5%.

v
!
!
u 
k1

4
u 2
k
b
k
1

r
1

Y tr k
4 2
k1
1r
1  b rk

Fig. 4. North American manufacturing [5]. b versus distance of vena contracta from
orice (in pipe lengths).

 1  PVC

4
P1
Y 1  0:41 0:35b
k

(6)

!
(7)

112

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

Fig. 6. Gas Expansion (Y) variances for difference valve geometries.

More recent research into the ASME approved factor by Seidl

[10] conrmed the errors rst indicated by Kinghorn. Various tests
were completed at pressure ratios from 0 to 0.2 and the expansion
factor calculated as with the ASME method. It is important to note
that at the referenced expansions factors and pressure drops that
the ow is laminar, with associated Reynolds number. The least
squares t derived from the Seidl paper resulted in Eq. (8). Seidl
concludes that the errors identied by Kinghorn have some merit
while suggesting that further testing is required to conrm the new
interpretation of data.

 1  PVC

4
P1
Y 1  0:357 0:557b
k

!
(8)

As the choke valve is the primary pressure drop point in

a production system the typical pressure differential tends to be
above the range of Seidls testing. The specialised ow equation for
the valve should therefore focus on effects towards the lower
limiting range of the expansion factor.
Research conducted by Cunningham [11] showed that the xed
critical limit for sharp edge orice plates was inconsistent at higher
pressure drops. The conclusion was that with suitable corrections
the expansion factor for non-critical ow could be used for thin
edged orice plates in all cases. However critical ow could be
expected for thick orice plates where the thickness was greater
than six times the orice diameter.

Fig. 7. Driskell [15]. Choked ow curve for liquid.

Fig. 8. Stiles [16]. VC specic volume versus pressure.

Additional analysis in the paper showed that the ASME denition of Y was accurate for values of P2 down as low as 0.63P1. After
this point the discontinuity increased to range from 12% to 40% of
actual ow. For outlet pressure lower than P2 0.63P1 the Cunningham corrected ASME equation can be used, see Eq. (9).

Fig. 9. Stiles [16]. Critical pressure ratio curve.

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

113

Fig. 10. IEC [2]. Critical pressure ratio curve.

 0:63  PVC

4
P1
Y Y0:63  0:49 0:45b
k

!
(9)

There is some continued debate as to the accuracy of the

expansion factor given by ASME and even the further clarication
by Cunningham. Kegel [12] proposes that in some cases the theoretical calculations are inadequate for subsonic ow. The Kegel
paper investigates the use of a theoretical expansion factor for two
different meters and proposes a meter specic gas expansion
factor. The proposal of an empirical formulation of Y for unique
ow meter designs is most applicable to the specialisation of the
orice plate equations to the choke valve capacity calculation seen
later.
The current equation for Y as used by [2] is based on the original
Driskell derivation. As can be seen in Eqs. (7) And (8) Y varies almost
linearly with (1 e P2/P1). The pressure terms in Eqs. (7) and (8) can
be replaced with x, the ratio of pressure differential, see Eq. (10).
Therefore Y can be written as an equation of a line given by Eq. (11),
where n is representative of the constants seen in Eqs. (7) and (8),
including b and k. As ow rate is directly proportional to Y times the
square root of x, see Eq. (12) and Eq. (4) (for reference), the rate of
change of ow rate with pressure drop can be given by Eq. (13). As
the ow rate chokes, Eq. (14), the limit of x becomes Eq. (15). Taking
into account the specic heat ratio (k) of the gas under consideration and the limit of x being xT, the expansion factor for a valve Y
can be given by Eq. (16).

x 1

p2
p  p2
1
p1
p1

(10)

Y 1  nx

(11)
1

mf1  nxx2

x2  nx2

(12)

dm
x2 3nx2


2
2
dx

(13)

dm
0
dx

(14)

x2 3nx2 ; n
1

Y 1

x
3kxT

1
3xT

(15)

(16)

This yields the limit of Y 0.667 as the limiting ow factor for

the choked ow condition. For an ideal restriction the differential
pressure drop ratio yielding choked ow is 0.528 (based on
specic heat of air and adiabatic expansion). For a specic valve
opening the critical pressure drop ratio could be as high as 0.81.
This is consistent with Cunninghams research into thin lipped
orice plates wherein choked ow could not be achieved

Fig. 11. IEC [13]. Flow test apparatus.

114

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

Fig. 14. Plot of Cv versus a for a 300 nominal choke valve.

Fig. 12. Choke valve internal geometry.

experimentally when the plate thickness was sufciently small

(affect on ow rate was negligible). The limit of the pressure drop
ratio (xT) for a valve opening needs to be determined experimentally per IEC 60534-2-1 [13].
As seen in Fig. 6 Y can be plotted against x for a number of
different valves based on their xT values (values taken from Typical
Values for differential pressure ratio factor xT at full rated ow, IEC
60534-2-1). The various valve internal geometries vary the slope of
the line.
It should be noted that the mechanism of choked ow for gas in
an orice plate or valve is different to that seen in an ideal restriction.
Assuming the valve port edge and orice plate are equivalent,
choked ow occurs due to an under-expanded jet forming outside
the port as the VC travels downstream. The limiting velocity occurs
in this cross-section which increases marginally as the pressure
differential increases. For an ideal restriction the limiting velocity
forms at the small cross-sectional area (throat) according to Eulers
equation, see Anderson [14], which cannot increase.
3.2. Valve pressure recovery, FL
The pressure recovery factor FL is specic to liquid ow in
control valves. As shown in Fig. 4 the location of the VC is well

Fig. 13. Plot of Cv versus a for a 200 nominal choke valve.

dened for an orice plate based on b. In the choke valve cage the
VC position is unknown and inaccessible. Therefore P2 cannot be
used in a valve specic equation.
In liquid ow, the downstream pressure (PVC) bears a constant
linear relationship to the pressure at the VC, given in Eq. (17). This
relationship holds for a non-vaporising uid, at a point where the
pressure has fully recovered. As the pressure differential (P1P2)
increases and the uid cavitates the pressure recovery factor is no
longer relevant as the uid has reached a limited ow condition, or
choked ow.

p
p
p
P1  P2

P1  P2 FL P1  PVC ; FL p
P1  PVC

(17)

FL can be determined experimentally for a valve opening from

the slope of the line drawn from the choked ow point and the
origin, as shown
in Fig. 7. The end region of proportionality
p
between FL and P1  P2 depends on the geometry of the valve.
Currently there are no standards dening this region for choke
valves. Stiles [16] analysed a series of ow curves without yielding
a mathematical expression. The primary issue with testing in this
region is that the valve will be in maximum owing condition. For
a large valve this requires a substantial pumping facility. For scaled
tests the changes in ow rates become proportionately smaller and
difcult to differentiate.

Fig. 15. Plot of Cv versus a for a 400 nominal choke valve.

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

115

Fig. 16. Pressure recovery factor versus a, for a 400 nominal valve.

Stiles proposed an equation to best describe the choked ow

state that approximates the actual pressure within the VC. Eq. (17)
is limited to the understanding that once the vapour pressure is
reached that the uid immediately chokes. Fig. 7 repeated in both
Stiles and Driskell shows that actual choking occurs at greater
pressure drops due to vaporisation not being fully developed at the
actual vapour pressure. Stiles highlights two basic assumptions of
a proposed choking equation. The rst assumption is that the ow
from the inlet to the VC has constant entropy. The assumption of
a constant enthalpy is discarded as it requires that no vapour be
present. Also the uid ow in the VC is much greater than that at
the inlet and therefore an isenthalpic process is impractical.
The assumption of isentropic ow is based on the fact that most
losses in contracting and expanding streams occur during expansion. So although there are losses in the system they occur
upstream of the VC and therefore the process can be said to be
isentropic between the inlet and the VC.
The second assumption is in the denition of the mixture
formula. Assuming that the uid at the inlet is in a liquid but fully
saturated condition the mixture quality E can be dened by Eq. (18);

SVC  SF
SFG

Fig. 18. Developments of different trim geometries and overlap.

compute the VC specic volume (denoted n) at each value of

assumed VC pressure, see Eq. (19).

nVC nF EnFG

A curve can be plotted from this data, dening the relationship

between pressure and specic volume for the uid in the VC, see
Fig. 8.
Mass ow through a restriction based on thermodynamic
principles can then be given Eq. (20).

(18)

with the quality of the mixture known the above relationship with
substitutions of specic volume for entropy may be used to

(19)

2g

VVC dPVC

(20)

As the mathematical relationship between VC specic volume

and pressure (as represented in Fig. 8) is not known the integral
must be obtained graphically. With values obtained, Eq. (20) can be
used to calculate values of mass ow rate for varying VC pressures,
see Fig. 9. It can be seen that such plots have steep slopes as the VC
pressure is reduced from the saturated liquid condition. The curve
slope decreases until a zero condition is reached indicating theoretical choked ow, as seen in Fig. 7. Continued reduction in VC
pressure shows a reduction in ow which is contrary to experimental results which show the ow rate maintained at the zero
slope position.
Stiles termed the maximum point on the curve in Fig. 9 as the
theoretical critical pressure ratio, rc given by Eq. (21).

rc

PVC
PV

(21)

Eq. (21) can be rearranged to present the VC pressure necessary

to produce a choked ow condition as seen in Eq. (22)

PVC rc PV
Fig. 17. Gas pressure drop ratio factor versus a, for a 400 nominal valve.

(22)

Further work was completed on characterizing the relationship

between rc and PV for water up to the thermodynamic critical

116

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

Fig. 19. Flow curve test results for trim geometries.

pressure, Pc. Values for choked ow VC pressure could be obtained

from the product of rc obtained from PV, and the PV value itself. It is
further seen from compiling a series of reference graphs for
different uids that there is a marked similarity in the shape of the
curve. The curves could be combined into one curve with little loss
in accuracy where the x-axis now represents the division of the
vapour pressure by the critical pressure of the actual uid concerned, see Fig. 10.
Therefore the limit of FL can be given by the vapour pressure of the
uid, whereas the effective choked pressure is dened by Eq. (23)

DPcritical FL2 P1  rc PV

(23)

with FL and xT experimentally determined for a series of valve

openings Eq. (4) can be rewritten in terms of Cv for a specialised
valve sizing equation see Eq. (24). Where Y 1 for liquid ow and
the effective pressure drop is limited by Eq. (23). For gas ow the
limit of Y and (P1P2) is given by Eq. (16). In Eq. (24) Cv represents
the required effective area open to ow for an operating condition.
In Eq. (4) Cm represents the actual ow area through an orice
based on upstream geometry, see b.

Cn

m
p
Y 2r2 P2  P2

(24)

3.3. Rated Cv for a valve

The ow curve Cv values for a valve opening are determined
experimentally, per IEC [13]. The test rig, as given in Fig. 11, consists
of the test valve, upstream and downstream throttling valves,
pressure sensors at either side of the test valve, a ow meter and
a temperature sensor.
The IEC test arrangement can cause inaccuracies in the determination of rated Cv values. When the test valve represents a high
resistance to ow in the line, slight errors in pressure calculation
have negligible effects on Cv. However when a valve is fully opened
the affect of slight pressure errors are signicant. The error in
pressure measurement has two sources e the pressure sensors and
pipe losses. The reading error in the sensors can be accounted for
and the calibration requirement is governed by the standard. The
pressure loss through the recommended straight pipe runs is not
accounted for. Driskell [13] states that since a control valve and the
process pipe are seldom the same sizes, it is not even feasible to
compensate for this situation by subtracting these pipe lengths in

calculation. The IEC standard states in Section 6 that the accuracy

of the test are only within 5% for dC2v < 0:0465 (IEC 60534-2-1, p. 19),
where d is the internal diameter of the ow rig pipe.
To ascertain the rated Cv, the valve is set to an opening position
with the upstream and downstream throttling valves used to set
a pressure drop across it. For each valve setting three different
pressure drops are used and the resultant inlet temperature and
ow rate is recorded. The third pressure drop setting can be used to
determine FL, see Fig. 7. At this pressure drop, the ow rate should
not increase for a 5% pressure increase and should see a decrease
for an equivalent decrease in pressure. This ensures that the uid in
the VC is not vaporising.
The tests should be repeated using air, in order to determine xT
and check for Cv duality. Different Cv values for liquid and gas are
sometimes evident in valves with smoothly contoured orice
passages rather than the sharp edge seen in orice plates and
typical choke cages. With a FL and xT value known for a setting,
three Cv results can be calculated from Eq. (24), where FL 1 for gas
and Y 1 for liquid. The rated Cv for the valve setting is the algebraic mean of the three Cv results, assuming they are with 3% of
each other. Values outside 3% are evident of unsteady state ow.
Other ow test methods exist including the Wu-Shung Fu [17]
method which proposed using high frequency data acquisition
techniques. The approach is limited to gas applications so is only
applicable to the calculation of Cv and xT. The technique enables
a blow-down system to be used where a constant pressure drop
need not be maintained. Due to the data acquisition technique, the
method can also be applied to valves under transient ow conditions. In addition the method eliminates the need for a ow meter
which has benets for the standard IEC technique as well as transient ow control valves, where transient ow meters are not
available.
4. FL, XT and rated Cv prediction
For an orice plate the meter coefcient (Cm) and VC position
can be determined from b. By dening a valve velocity of approach
(a) comparable graphs can be generated for the valve specic
equation. These plots can then be used for any new trim design,
giving the total ow area in terms of a rated Cv and xT/FL used to
calculate required Cv. This rated Cv can then be used to plot a ow
curve (Cv versus stem travel), which can be used to verify trim
suitability against required Cv and control characteristic.

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

The valve velocity of approach shall be the ratio of the upstream

area to the controlling port area within the valve. The internal
geometry of a choke is well dened based on its nominal size.
Regardless of connecting pipe the valve reduces to identical inlet
and outlet bores. These bores are connected via an annular area as
detailed in Fig. 12. Fluid travels from the inlet and is split in the
annulus by the cage, which it passes around before entering the
ports and exiting through the outlet bore. The inlet and outlet bores
are sized an order of magnitude greater than the total area of the
controlling ports, such that the cage always presents the greatest
restriction. Therefore the upstream area of most concern in a valve
is that present in the annulus.
Within the annulus cylindrical areas can be taken at a number of
diameters including; the cage surface (D6), at the mid-point (D5) or
at the annular wall (D4), as seen in Fig. 12. It has been proven
through experimentation that the annular wall area accounts most
for the upstream geometry variations. Thus the ratio of total port
area open to ow divided by the annular wall area gives the valve
velocity of approach factor, a see Eq (25).

pD3 h
Total Uncovered Port Area

(25)

A series of ow tests were conducted on three nominal sized

choke valves e 0.05 m (200 ), 0.076 m (300 ) and 0.1 m (400 ). Each valve
was tested with 3 different trim characteristics. By design the
annular area for each valve was not scaled. Therefore the ratio of
port area to annular wall area varied for each valve, with the biggest
difference being apparent on the 400 nominal size. Figs. 13, 14 and 15
detail the plots of Cv versus a for the 3 sets of standard trim sizes. It
is important to note that the area open to ow for various Cv values
occur at different stem travels.
All three Cv curves present relatively consistent data regardless of
stem position, indicating that the position of the ports relative to the
annular wall area does not vary the ow efciency greatly. Also the
division of total area does not apparently reduce the overall Cv value
in the range reviewed. This is most likely related to the erosion
guidelines for choke design which maximise the spacing between
ports to ensure as large a quantity of material exists. This limits the
total number of ports in a choke valve trim that can be opened at any
one time. It is expected that a cage with numerous ports would
present a much greater reduction in Cv for a similar cumulative area.
A parametric equation has been produced for each nominal size
based on a best t trend line for the plots presented. The trend lines
associated with the data yields less than a 5% difference from
experimental results. A 5% prediction accuracy combined with
standard sizing practices is suitable for design. For the valve sizes
presented the parametric equations can be used to predict rated Cv
for new geometries within reasonable accuracy.
Using the same rationale, plots of FL and xT versus a have been
complied for the nominal sizes. Figs. 16 and 17 present those
specic to the 400 valve size. As expected FL is high at small openings
where the ratio of port area to annulus area is low, creating a high
convergence at the VC. As the total port area increase and convergence at the VC reduces the total recovery declines but remains
somewhat linear.
From Fig. 16 it can be seen that xT never approaches 1 for a choke
valve. A value of 1 would meet Cunninghams experiments where
a limited ow was never achieved. These predicted values of xT and FL,
for a new trim design, can be used with Eq (24) to calculate required Cv.
5. Parametric model application
The parametric model was applied to a new reduced capacity
trim designed for a specic low ow control requirement in a 400

117

nominal valve. Fig. 18 details the development of the cage for both
the new reduced design and a 100%linear prole previously tested
(for comparison).
The 400 nominal parametric equation, see Eq. (26) taken from
Fig. 15, was used to plot the rated Cv curve based on the total area
open to ow at a number of valve steps, see Curve 1 in Fig. 19.

Cv 7476:2a3 2540a2 737a 5:67

(26)

Values for FL and xT were determined from Figs. 16 and 17 and

the required Cv was calculated from the application data. With the
required Cv values lying within the controllable range of Curve 1 the
trim was manufactured and ow tested. The ow test results are
shown in Fig. 19 as Curve 2. As seen the predicted curve (Curve 1)
and the experimental curve (Curve 2) are within 5% of each other.
In order to conrm the effect of annular wall area on a and
resultant rated Cv the trim was ow tested in another valve body of
reduced annular wall area, as seen in Curve 3 in Fig. 19. The total
reduction in Cv is apparent, where the loss is in excess of 10% of
maximum capacity. For a valve with this specic annular area a new
parametric equation would be required to predict the rated Cv. Flow
tests would need to be repeated on standard trim characteristics to
reproduce Eq. (26).
6. Conclusion
A parametric equation for a series of nominal valve sizes, that
predicts rated Cv based on upstream geometry has been presented.
The parametric equation constants are based on a series of experimental data taken from a number of ow tests. It has been shown
that this equation gives good estimates of Cv for new trim designs
and also effectively takes into account the variation in upstream
geometry. As part of this equation a new valve geometry ratio (a)
has been dened based on the velocity of approach area ratio (b),
for orice plates.
In addition, prediction graphs for both xT and FL have been
presented. These enable required Cv values to be plotted on the
predicted rated Cv graph in order to quantify controllability.
These equations are most effective when the trim cage consists
of a small number of ports, the ports have thin wall sections relative
to the ow area and annular area is an order of magnitude greater
than the inlet bore area.
References
[1] Hutchinson James. ISA control valve handbook. 3rd ed. ISA Publishers; 1997.
[2] IEC 60534-2-1 Mod: ow equations for sizing control valves, Switzerland,
International Electro-technical Commission.
[3] Driskell, Les. Control valve selection and sizing. 1st ed. North Carolina: Creative
Services Inc; 1983.
[4] Essom Company Limited. Determination of ow rate by orice plate; 2007.
[5] North American Maufacturing Co. Bulletin 8695, orice plates and ange
specications; 1989.
[6] Baumann H. control valve primer: a users guide. ISA Publishers; 1998.
[7] Buckingham E. Notes on the orice meter: the expansion factor for gases.
Bureau of Standards Journal of Research July 1932;9. Research Paper No. 459.
[8] Bean HS. Values of discharge coefcients of square-edged orices. American
Gas Association Monthly; July, 1935.
[9] Kinghorn FC. The expansibility correction for orice plates: EEC data. Paper
5.2, Presented at the International Conference on Flow Measurement in the
Mid 80s. East Kilbride, Glasgow, Scotland: National Engineering Laboratory;
June 9e12, 1986.
[10] Seidl W. The orice expansion correction factor for a 50 mm line size at
various diameter ratios. 3rd International Symposium. In: Fluid ow
measurement. Colorado, USA: Colorado Engineering Experiment Station Inc;
2002. p. 1e11.
[11] Cunningham RG. Orice Meters with Supercritical Compressible Flow. Trans.
ASME 1951;73:625e38.
[12] Kegel T. Compressible ow effects in subsonic venturis. 3rd International
Symposium. In: Fluid ow measurement. Colorado, USA: Colorado Engineering Experiment Station Inc; 2002. p. 12e21.

118

A. Grace, P. Frawley / International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 88 (2011) 109e118

[13] IEC 60534-2-3: ow capacity test procedures, Switzerland, International

Electro-technical Commission.
[14] Anderson JD. Fundamentals of aerodynamics. 3rd ed. Singapore: McGraw-Hill; 2001.
[15] Driskell Les. Sizing theory and applications. In: Hutchison JW, editor. ISA
handbook of control valves; 1984. p. 180e90. North Carolina.

[16] Stiles GF. Cavitation and ashing considerations. In: Hutchison JW, editor. ISA
handbook of control valves; 1984. p. 206e20. North Carolina.
[17] Fu Wu-Shung. A concise method for determining a valve ow coefcient of
a valve under compressible gas ow. In: Experimental thermal and uid
science, 18. Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publisher; 1998. p. 307e13.